Our response to the latest consultation

Submitted 17 June 2024

As the UK Committee on Research Integrity, we’re pleased to have the chance to respond to your consultation about Open Access in REF 2029. We also plan to publish this letter on our website. Open access is central to Open and Transparent Communication, a principle described in the UK’s Concordat to Support Research Integrity. REF has supported adoption of open research practices to the benefit of society and to trust in research. 

The Committee recognises the power of REF both to assess research excellence and drive change across the sector. REF has helped the sector to embrace open access of research outputs, in line with the Government’s 2020 R&D Roadmap. We note with satisfaction that the UK is now one of the world-leaders in open access research publication.

REF has had positive effects on awareness of, and the moral case for, open access publication. Many of the aspirations relating to open access publications have now been met, but there is still a need to take stock of unintended consequences, including for the public purse. Despite the long lead-in to open access mandates, their unintended negative consequences are now an increasing concern. We have two recommendations:

• Many funders have mandated open access for publications. This has led to excellent engagement with open research practices and we support work to deepen that engagement. However, REF assesses all research carried out in eligible UK higher education institutions and their departments. These are diverse in their shape and funding sources and it is important not to disadvantage researchers in certain fields. So that REF remains rigorous in its ability to include all research we recommend that the requirement for open access publication remains equivalent to that of REF 2021.

• The financial costs of open access publication incurred by institutions and research teams remain considerable and need to be balanced with benefit. Policies that deepen or widen requirements of open access, whether through individual ‘APCs’ or ‘transformational’ agreements, are increasing. Changes that place further bureaucratic or financial costs into higher education are challenging, and we note particular concerns about costs for publication of long-form outputs. So that REF does not disincentivise research that cannot access funds to pay for open access publication while ensuring that research outputs are as open as possible, we recommend that Green Open Access continues to be sufficient to meet REF requirements. 

REF is vital to the sector and to the UK nations, ensuring appropriate allocation of public resource. We support REF as a process that delivers robust, expert peer review of UK research, that supports and drives sectoral improvement where needed.